Latest News

The Middle East Research Ethics Training Initiative (MERETI) was established in 2005 and since then approximately 100 ividuals have received Certificate Training in Research Ethics. Trainees have come from Egypt, Sudan, Jordan, Morocco, Libya, and Yemen.

Background: Children’s participation is crucial in research on childhood diseases and cases associated with childhood health. Despite the existence of many publications that address ethical issues related to the participation of children in clinical research around the world, very little has been written about these ethical issues from an Islamic perspective. Methods: In this study, we analyzed medical research on children from three Islamic resources: plural fatwas by juristic institutions, the opinions of Islamic medical organizations and individual writings. Results: Seven plural fatwas from three juristic councils could be found. Only four of them raise ethical concerns about research on children. Two documents from medical organizations were identified. Conclusion: Three different positions could be concluded from these fatwas: a total prohibition, prohibition unless and permission. Prevention any harm is a major concern in all fatwas. Guardian's consent is necessary, but more details are needed. The guidelines of Islamic Organization of Medical Sciences IOMS reflect the best available Islamic perspective about research on children.

Research ethics and quality assurance are issues of growing concern in our universities and institutions of research. Imagine our surprise when two research articles published in two different refereed journals by different groups of authors but with exactly the same content were brought to our attention at APHRC’s training workshop on research leadership in September 2015. The publications were one and the same!

Concerns have been raised about proposed revision of US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) human research ethics regulations. The HHS is suggesting changes regarding the regulation of the use of biospecimens for research, the supervision of multicentre studies, and the need for ethics oversight for trials not involving invasive interventions.

Specifically, the HHS would require scientists to obtain explicit consent from patients before using their blood or tissue for research. The new protocol is designed to prevent issues like the case of Henrietta Lacks, a black woman whose tissue was used without permission in cancer research for decades. But a number of specialists are concerned that the new rules would add unnecessary red tape to research.

Other researchers are worried about changes to regulation of multi-site studies by institutional review boards. Under the proposed rules, one centralized institutional review board could run an entire multicenter study, rather than IRBs at each location participating in oversight. Some advocates and bioethicists worry that streamlining study reviews would undermine protections for volunteers, especially studies involving many sites.

Certain exemptions have also been proposed for studies that do not pose physical risks, such as projects that only involve asking subjects questions and answers in surveys and in-depth interviews.But this change is raising fears, too. Those kinds of studies "are not physically invasive, but they may be intrusive," Ruth Macklin, a bioethicist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, told NPR. "There are forms of harm that are not just physical harm."

Probing people about sensitive subjects, such as whether they've had an abortion or have been physically or sexually abused as children, can trigger strong emotional reactions, potentially causing psychological distress, Macklin says.